Poor Charles Karel Bouley
Poor Charles Karel Bouley. It’s everybody’s fault but his.
P.S. O’Reilly should have invited Bouley to appear — and O’Reilly should have been prepared to counter Bouley’s dishonest pretense that he hadn’t really said anything that offensive. That would have been good television.
UPDATE: In case you missed the language from his post that was so offensive, I chronicled it in this post.
Incidentally, he deleted the offensive language, originally without acknowledging that he’d done so. It took Michelle Malkin, putting pressure on the editor of the Huffington Post on “The O’Reilly Factor,” to get that simple acknowledgement. (By the way, notifying readers when you have edited a post is something that most of us bloggers already know to do.)
Karel, opened his radio show the week Reagan died with a song from the Wizard of Oz, ‘Ding dong the Witch is dead’.
ABC (549bf4) — 4/1/2007 @ 2:14 pmDon’t feel too badly, Mr Bouley: I haven’t been invited on Mr O’Reilly’s show either.
Of course, I haven’t made enough of a splash for anyone to quote me, either. š
Dana (556f76) — 4/1/2007 @ 2:35 pmThese days, O’Reilly is almost never prepared for a serious discussion. When he seems prepared he is often wrong. He may blame his researchers, but the bottom line is that he is a star and like almost all stars he is now a lazy star and increasingly boring. He used to be very good; he’s now just very loud and sometimes very good.
Howard Veit (4ba8d4) — 4/1/2007 @ 2:39 pmMaybe Karel can get Michael Ware to interview him.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 4/1/2007 @ 3:00 pmI agree with Howard Veit:
O’Reilly gets some people on who really deserve to be rebutted in the strongest terms. If you know anything about a subject it becomes apparent he, or his staff, have not discovered really important points. Hence his reponse can serve to mislead the viewer.
davod (6f3f2b) — 4/1/2007 @ 3:28 pmIsn’t Bouley the guy who said Tony Snow deserved to get cancer?
papertiger (1afea2) — 4/1/2007 @ 3:48 pmAnd now he is complaining that someone misjudged him?
When Snow asks forgiveness, as Lee Atwater did, I’ll reconsider by absolute indifference to his fate.
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 3:50 pmAF: If there is a generalization to be made here, it is that leftists more commonly demand the “correct” political opinions from people before they will acknowledge their humanity sufficiently to wish them well in dire circumstances. By contrast, conservatives like myself do not demand the same of liberals like Elizabeth Edwards or Bill Clinton.
You have done nothing to dispel this particular stereotype; in fact, you reinforce it.
Patterico (05b0eb) — 4/1/2007 @ 4:08 pmThat’s a generalization you want to make. It’s silly, but feel free.
You’re trying to score points, playing politics out of Snow’s illness and one silly and pretty soft post.
Published wishes that others might die a painful death, should have been targets of Al Qaeda, deserve to rot or burn in hell or simply will, are traitors and should be hung or shot: these I associate with the right. That’s “published” wishes in mainstream publications. I also associate actual bombings and assassinations in this country and support for such activity over the last 20 years more with the right more the the left: anti-abortion terrorists, militias etc. The Unibomber has no defenders as far as I can tell. And the popularity of the “Left Behind” series worries me.
In private conversations of course all bets are off on all sides. People are vulgar and both you and I know it.
And don’t confuse “politically correct” liberals with the left. Most PC types are guilt-ridden professionals who act that way only to avoid the bigger issues: the people from the lower-classes who mop their floors. Remember: I’m not a fan of George Soros (or David Geffen)
O’Reilly is an ass. Bouley wrote a post about wanting not to care and being unable to do it. That’s it, right?
Speaking for myself, and only for myself, I don’t care. I wouldn’t care much about Clinton either, or his wife. Elizabeth Edwards seems better than any of them from what I can gather.
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 5:03 pmJust to add: as the child of staff members of the ACLU I had to explain to even to some “liberals” why that organization defended the Nazis in Skokie and later why they filed a brief on behalf of Ollie North.
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 5:31 pmPersonal contempt has no bearing on the Constitution and the rule of law, but I have abolute contempt for a lot of people.
You reinforce Patterico’s point, AF, even though you find it “silly.” You, and your fellow travelers, can’t get over your anger and bitterness towards those who disagree with you politically long enough to act humanely towards them. Whether or not you are willing to admit it, it’s a very serious character defect and suggests that you do not belong in what we used to refer to as “polite company.”
You say:
Published wishes that others might die a painful death, should have been targets of Al Qaeda, deserve to rot or burn in hell or simply will, are traitors and should be hung or shot: these I associate with the right.
Have you forgotten Ward Churchill, Nicholas De Genova, Kos, and all the other radical leftists who have openly wished ill on Americans, especially those who are in Iraq?
You then follow it up with:
I also associate actual bombings and assassinations in this country and support for such activity over the last 20 years more with the right more the the left: anti-abortion terrorists, militias etc. The Unibomber has no defenders as far as I can tell. And the popularity of the āLeft Behindā series worries me.
You beat me to the punch on the Unibomber as an example of left-wing violence, though I reject your claim that he has been more ostracized on the left than anti-abortion terrorists have on the right. And if the popularity of the “Left Behind” series worries you, imagine how we feel about the popularity of books by Michael Moore and Jimmy Carter. At least the “Left Behind” stuff is acknowledged as fiction.
I actually agree that O’Reilly is an ass — I never could stand his style — but I think that Bouley is even more contemptible, as is that phony harridan who owns the website he writes for. That does not mean, however, that I wish pain and suffering on them. That sort of ugly schadenfreude I associate with the left.
JVW (bcc29b) — 4/1/2007 @ 5:50 pmI had to look up De Genova; no one defends Churchill, though his right to speak is another matter, and Kos? US Army 89-92 And proud Veteran?
“Wished ill of Americans?” What kind of Americans? Maybe ones you like and he doesn’t? Perhaps you mean the Mercs who are unanswerable to anyone? And Jimmy Carter? Yeah, he’s just like Ward Churchill.
“papertiger” on another post
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 6:25 pmnice guys all around
There goes your attempt at pretending to intellectualism. Do you know what the word “mercenary” means, and do you comprehend that contractors work for employers who hold contracts?
Not just twaddle, but disgusting twaddle.
If you could explain them imposing speech restrictions on members of their board, that might be helpful.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/1/2007 @ 6:40 pmI have more sympathy for the “contractors” than for the firms who hire them. Still, I don’t like Mercs, and you do little more than insult and quibble.
“If you could explain them imposing speech restrictions on members of their board, that might be helpful.”
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:00 pmHere’s the explanation, but they don’t want to hear it: Save the ACLU
No, I understand the meaning of the word and you clearly do not, or you do not care to use it properly. Why not just call them Nazis and be done with it. You remember, these guys, the dirty Nazis that were providing security for a food service convoy. For money! Screw them, right?
If you’re going to go over the top, what’s the point in half stepping? As I said, disgusting.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:05 pmPatterico, it would be helpful if you would add the portion of the article (or the O’Reilly transcript) that includes the offensive phrase.
aunursa (56dfae) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:07 pmHmph, new HTML isues. These guys.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:08 pmI posted a link to a piece on the lawsuit filed by the families. No comment from you?
How about Blackwater.
Good for the troops? Good for the country?
My father served. My brother served. My uncle was a POW in Germany.
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:24 pmStuff it up your ass.
Find me someone who gets killed on the job and the family doesn’t sue, then we’ll have something to talk about.
Those four men were Americans supporting the American effort. 3 of the four were veterans, as am I. Which I think trumps the reflected glory of your relatives, who I should point out, are not you.
You should get a dictionary and take that advice. But look up “mercenary” first, you vile puke.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:30 pmAnd I’m with that sonofabitch William Westmoreland: bring back the draft.
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:30 pmAsk someone else for the quote. I’m sure someone here knows it (probably a fan of Uncle Miltie)
Why is this post filed under “Scum” ?
Is it because Bouley is a homosexual or is it because he’s angry at Bill O’Reilly?
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:31 pm#21 TLA
Neither. Are you a troll?
aunursa (56dfae) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:35 pmI just reread both of his pieces – the allegedly offensive cancer one and the one linked to on this post. I don’t get why he is “scum.”
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:38 pmTLA, you really are a moron, you know that?
It’s posted under “scum” because Bouley made a post in such bad taste as to almost succeed in shocking me. His “i don’t wish cancer blah blah blah but I had the thought” bit of his was beyond horrible.
Luckily, I’m become mostly immune to liberal hypocracy. Such love and compassion you all have…
And because it fits: “Troll blather troll blather troll blather”
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:43 pmTLA, you do reaize that if you read his post on Huff it was a self-redacted version, right? He cut the worst part, shocked that people would dare call him to task for something he said…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:44 pmI know of nobody who wishes Tony Snow harm. I was personally very upset by the news that he had liver cancer. Where are these declarations by liberals – and Bouley – that supposedly celebrate Tony Snow’s cancer? I want to know.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:45 pmYeah – I realize he edited it. He said so clearly. What was it that he removed, in its entirety?
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:46 pmP.S. I love it when you guys pull “Ward Churchill” out of your asses. Ward who?!
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:47 pmYou know f no one? You don’t read many liberal blogs then, do you… They were FILLED with ill-wishers. Innundated, you might say.
While the right’s worst offense regarding Mrs. Edwards’ cancer return was the accusation that perhaps her husband was attempting to make political hay (frankly, it’s a fair point that he might be), the left-side of the isle was death-wishes… I’ll find a copy of Chuck’s comments for you, since you seem unable to.
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:48 pmThat’s because he went back and edited the offensive remarks out of his original piece. You can’t tell which I guess goes to show how gratitous they were in the first place.
gahrie (de5a83) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:49 pmScott:
Yes, please do find comments by a liberal of note somewhere – anywhere – who celebrated Tony Snow’s cancer. Please provide links. We’re waiting.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:52 pmI quote dirrectly:
“CNN has decided this week to be the Cancer News Network…
I hear about Tony Snow and say to myself, well, stand up every day, lie to the American people at the behest of your dictator-esque boss and well, how could a cancer NOT grow in you. Work for Fox News, spinning the truth in to a billion knots and how can your gut not rot? I know, it’s terrible. I admit it. I don’t wish anyone harm, even Tony Snow. And I do hope he recovers or at least does what he feels is best and surrounds himself with friends and family for his journey. But in the back of my head there’s Justin Timberlake’s “What goes around, goes around, comes around, comes all the way back around, ya…”
Now, I’ve been brutally honest above, and may have offended some, and for that I’m sorry. Again, I don’t want Tony Snow to suffer and die of cancer. But like many this morning, I had the thought.”
And you know Ward Chuchil… The celebrated native american from CU who has more charges of plaugurism and ethics violations than the Cubbies have season-ending chokes…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:53 pmI love when you guys call Blackwater employees ‘mercenaries’. Traditionally, a mercenary is someone who will gladly work for either side as long as the money is right. Do you have any evidence that the four murdered contractors whose deaths Kos gloated over so vulgarly would have been willing to work for the other side for any price?
Dr. Weevil (33716c) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:57 pmWell – Bouley’s comment was indeed offensive. He did seem to qualify it with several caveats, however, and he did self-redact it, as he should have.
– – –
So you’ve figured out that we all secretly worship and take orders from Ward Churchill, have you? Excellent work.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:58 pmOddly, my comment on this piece at HuffPo has been in moderation for 3 days. Perhaps they disallow the words “smug prick” whilst allowing death fantasies for serving Vice-Presidents, but it seems suspiciously like censorship to me. How very progressive.
“Liberal” Avenger, you are a disingenuous, lying asshole, and your fantasy that anyone finding Bouder’s musings offensive is due to his sexual orientation is just absolute projection. Fuck you.
carlitos (28b544) — 4/1/2007 @ 7:59 pmhttp://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_03/011013.php#1069128
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_03/011013.php#1069721
gahrie (de5a83) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:01 pmWow, carlitos. Are you ok? I guess the news about Tony Snow’s cancer has hit you really hard. Take some time off, man. Relax.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:03 pmThank you, gahrie. Those comments from “JeffII” and “Anon” are quite damning to the entire liberal movement. I didn’t realize that you had such persuasive evidence on hand.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:05 pmPretty weak, LA. Kinda like when you denied and redacted the Carlitos thing and started spewing caveats like a heretofore unheard of caveat vending machine. Have you poured Professor Churchill one of your world famous manshakes? There must be an enormous measure of pride in one of those, huh?
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:05 pmI honor their service.
But it has not a thing to do with your moral bankruptcy.
Darleen (1176c2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:06 pmYawn, Pablo.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:08 pmGlug, glug, LA.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:09 pmTLA
The problem is that “the liberal movement” is no longer liberal.
You don’t take your orders from Ward Churchill, you just worship at the same Leftist cult church. Or maybe a different pew, but the same fundamentalist dogma right next to Rosie “fire can’t melt steel” O’Donnell.
Darleen (1176c2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:11 pmI’d enjoy hearing why the “liberal movement” is no longer liberal. If it isn’t liberal, what is it, then?
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:13 pmTLA…
Lets make the following analogy: Lets say you beat some form of cancer, only to find it’s returned, and is pretty darn serious.
I then, finding you to be a contemptable waste of basic carbon (which would be better used to make pencil lead), post how while it would be wrong to wish death upon you and while i didn’t hope you would die from it, I had had the thought…
Wouldn’t it strike you as a bit in poor taste? Even if I removed it later, it would till be out there. I had said it. It would be out there.
What he did wasn’t just mean and mosterous, it was cowardly. At the least he could stand behind what he says.
And for the record, should you actually BE a cancer survivor, the only death I wish for you is one from very very old age.
I mean, how else will you learn how wrong you are, if you don’t live a long time to see it? š
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:13 pmAnd yes, I am fond of Rosie O’Donnell. She is a tough, northeastern Irish-American. My kind of people!
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:15 pmSocialist. They didn’t tell you? I can’t imagine why they’d leave such a prominent Avenger out of the loop. Perhaps they didn’t want to get any on them.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:18 pmTLA, she’s also prone to some of the most ignorant statements possible… “Gulf of Tonkin”? Yeah, shame it’s documented to not have happened.
And her blaming the UK for the 15 sailors Iran is holding hostage strikes me as, say we say, incorrect…
As to what the liberal movement is now? I’d have to say “facist” if I had to put a name to it. The tendancy to demand the silence of anyone that fails to agree strikes me as similar.
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:19 pmThank you, Scott. I wish you the same.
There’s no question that Bouley’s comments were offensive, caveats and all. I still don’t think that makes him “scum.” A “smug prick” a la carlitos, perhaps, but not scum.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:20 pmPablo, Darleen, it’s pointless to have this discussion. Here is one active topic on the “liberal” avenger’s blog –
Cure for Parkinsons comes too late for John Paul II
Do you really think that the (well-documented) conservative death and disease-wishing that is par for the course for today’s “liberal” is worth debating with this liar? Don’t waste your bandwidth.
carlitos (28b544) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:20 pmWell, my fondness for Rosie O’Donnell doesn’t mean that I watch her or keep track of her positions on every issue or even agree with her on anything.
Why do you conservatives always try to foist every high-profile liberal’s viewpoints onto all of us? It’s not as if we’re The Borg.
And oh yes, liberals = fascists. That’s quite a chuckle.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:23 pmOne man’s “smug prick” is another man’s scum…
You should hear how I talk about Falwell…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:24 pmTLA
JFK and FDR were liberals. The liberal movement at one time was as anti-Left as the conservative movement.
But there is nothing “liberal” about college speech codes, multi-culturalism, racial quotas, campaign “finance reform”, Fairness doctrine, and outcome based “equality” … a few things that come readily to mind.
American liberals also used to be patriotic and proud to be American. Now Leftists are as nihilistic and sneer at national identity as any invertebrate Euro.
Darleen (1176c2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:25 pmI didn’t write that post, carlitos, but I did get quite a laugh out of the post’s title.
The nun had Parkinson’s disease and she and her fellow nuns directed their prayers at the Dead Pope – and she was cured!
If true, then it really is ironic that he died of Parkinson’s disease, isn’t it?
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:25 pmWell, perhaps it might be advisable to remain up to date on the public, televised statements of prominent liberals and denounces those that are – at the least – factually false. And the morally reprehensable. Please, could you start to call people out on those?
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:26 pmDarleen:
It’s true. I’ve always felt that a strong sense of “national identity” was something associated with the weak of mind and character.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:28 pmClassic case of projection.
Darleen (1176c2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:29 pmOK, Scott.
The next time I see Ward Churchill I’ll give him a piece of my mind!
Goodnight, silly people.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:29 pm*sigh*
At this rate, you’re going to need to live to about 126…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:30 pmYeah, the photoshops of the Pope with canned ham were hilarious too. Happy Palm Sunday. May you achieve total consciousness immediately prior to your demise. As noted, hopefully around age 126.
carlitos (28b544) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:34 pmTLA
I’m not surprised. You struck me as an evolutionary dead end long ago.
Darleen (1176c2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:35 pmRep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) : “The Democrats’ honeymoon is fixing to end. It’s going to explode like an IED.”
Vulgarity and tastelessness, oh dear.
Here’s another link about Blackwater. Darleen, why don’t you read it.
And then there’s Dyncorp:
Don’t lecture me about moral bankruptcy.
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:40 pmWell, look what happens when you spend a couple of hours away from patterico.com. You try to reply to comment #12, and you end up down at comment #50 or so.
AF, as I recall you played the “uncle was a POW, so shove it up your ass” card a couple of months back. How many more punches do you have on that ticket? I believe I told you earlier, I don’t want to shove your uncle up my ass, I personally find that sort of recreation abhorrent, even if it is considered sport in your neighborhood. And it is an especially vile way to treat someone who served his country with such sacrifice.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you had to look up Nicholas De Genova, he is every bit as well-known (if not more so) than any of the righties that you claim are being so mean-spirited. And despite your claims to the contrary, De Genova stands as an example of a leftist who openly wished for American servicemen and women to be killed by the enemy. Glad he is on your team, huh AF. And hooray for Kos’s army service, as if that provided him a free pass to sneer at the death of American workers in Iraq. I somehow don’t see you reckoning that John McCain’s past as a POW means that he must be right about the troop surge.
And comes now The Liberal Avenger with his usual brand of malarky. Of course you don’t like it when we refer to Ward Churchill. It was leftists like you who hired Churchill despite his lack of qualifications, leftists like you who repeatedly ignored Churchill’s academic dishonesty, and leftists like you who (your claims to the contrary) did everything they could in order to prevent the University of Colorado from disciplining him in any meaningful way.
I am not surprised that you find Rosie O’Donnell to be your “kind of people.” She is a halfwitted, smug, obnoxious, dingbat who gives her fans comfort in the idea that someone so stupid, so grating, so unattractive, so dull, and so laughably inane can still win life’s lottery and get rich and famous. Hope for all, eh?
JVW (bcc29b) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:41 pmDynCorp is the same company whose employees hired child prostitutes while working in Bosnia a few years ago, until some people started complaining. Rather than face local justice or courts-martial, the perpetrators were simply sent home.
The UN must have been pissed — their workers were no doubt trying to hire the same child prostitutes at a fraction of the price.
JVW (bcc29b) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:46 pmWhy not? You are in dire need of lessons.
Darleen (1176c2) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:50 pm“Nicholas De Genova, he is every bit as well-known (if not more so) than any of the righties that you claim are being so mean-spirited.”
No, he isn’t. He’s a college teacher not a politician or a pundit.
And I don’t go on about “mean spirited righties” I just think it’s silly when noisy schmucks whine about other people’s vulgarity.
Churchill was accused of academic misconduct, not making offensive comments. If he committed misconduct then whatever punishment is appropriate is fine by me.
We have an Empire, You think it’s cool. A lot of people don’t.
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:52 pmAs for Rosie O’Donnell, that’s TLA’s territory, and I don’t have much interest in either of them.
I react to O’Reilly representing “the Right” the same way Bouley would probably react to Michael Moore being considered an accurate representation of “the Left” in its entirety.
And besides, who is the guy? Reading this post at Patterico is the first I’ve ever heard of him. Why is his opinion worthy of mention anywhere?
Ray G (50194a) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:53 pmDarleen, from your link:
“Bolkovacās former employer DynCorp, an American security firm which supplied staff to the UN, was forced to pay Ā£110,000 in compensation.”
It’s a mess isn’t it? Human Rights Watch certainly thinks so. I didn’t think you were such a fan of theirs
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 8:58 pmAF
MY link?
Darleen (1176c2) — 4/1/2007 @ 9:16 pmMY apology
AF (c319c8) — 4/1/2007 @ 9:19 pmLA says:
Why is this post filed under āScumā ?
Is it because Bouley is a homosexual or is it because heās angry at Bill OāReilly?
Suggesting that I think homosexuals are scum: the typical cheap shot from my friend, the acknowledged liar, the Liberal Avenger. Roast in hell, my dishonest friend.
LA says:
I just reread both of his pieces – the allegedly offensive cancer one and the one linked to on this post. I donāt get why he is āscum.ā
I’ve updated the post with a link to the deleted language, for the benefit of clueless lefties such as yourself.
I am confident that you still won’t see why he’s scum, LA, since you are on record chuckling at jokes about Snow’s cancer.
carlitos says:
āLiberalā Avenger, you are a disingenuous, lying asshole, and your fantasy that anyone finding Bouderās musings offensive is due to his sexual orientation is just absolute projection. Fuck you.
I’ll second that sentiment.
Patterico (04465c) — 4/1/2007 @ 9:21 pmRay
Karel used to have a radio gig with his partner, Andrew Howard, at KFI640 in Los Angeles. They were slightly amusing, but their gay schtick was both too stereotypical and vapid for my taste.
They even made afternoon drive time for a while when KFI dropped the John&Ken show when John&Ken went into syndication.
But they couldn’t live up to the demands of the timeslot.
Howard died and Karel does a show out of Frisco.
Darleen (1176c2) — 4/1/2007 @ 9:25 pmSo which are you, a liar or an idiot?
Crimso (4b4e48) — 4/2/2007 @ 5:29 am“So which are you, a liar or an idiot?”
Begin here- Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq
And go on- history of us military interventions
If you’re going to defend something you should at least know something about it. Living in a Republic it is your responsibility; it’s part of your job.
AF (c319c8) — 4/2/2007 @ 6:24 amIf you want to be so lazy find yourself a king: somewhere else.
Wasting my time
AF (c319c8) — 4/2/2007 @ 6:36 amThe Case for American Empire
” āGulf of Tonkinā? Yeah, shame itās documented to not have happened.”
– Scott Jacobs
I take it you’re saying that there was no falsified attack on the US in the Gulf of Tonkin, that the attack was real, and that fullscale US entry into Vietnam wasn’t consequently based on a lie.
In that case…
Go ahead and link to any mainstream publication that legitimizes that tripe.
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/2/2007 @ 7:36 amI suppose it would be completely over your head to point out the peole who “did that” were, in fact, democrats/dem-appointees…
Scott Jacobs (e3904e) — 4/2/2007 @ 9:26 amStill, I donāt like Mercs
Uh, how would you know what a “Merc” is, exactly?
Because the way you’re referring to them is wrong.
That aside, the fact of the matter is that you can’t bring yourself to admit that what Bouley did was wrong.
But you’ll rush to point out imagined wrongs committed by the “right wing.”
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 9:41 amWhy do you conservatives always try to foist every high-profile liberalās viewpoints onto all of us? Itās not as if weāre The Borg.
Uh, because you and your fellow travelers never speak up to disagree with them maybe?
Just look at what is taking place here.
Not one of you silly leftists can bother to say the despicable comments about Snow were wrong.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 9:46 amMy father served. My brother served. My uncle was a POW in Germany.
Stuff it up your ass.
Comment by AF
Hahaha, funny stuff.
Gee, I wonder why you didn’t?
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 9:52 amI know of nobody who wishes Tony Snow harm. I was personally very upset by the news that he had liver cancer. Where are these declarations by liberals – and Bouley – that supposedly celebrate Tony Snowās cancer? I want to know.
Comment by The Liberal Avenger
Uh, surely you most be joking.
And:
rid of these people
How about this gem?
Simply put, you must pretend to be ignorant on the matter so you can pretend this doesn’t happen.
Wake me up when someone on the right sells Tony has no colon T-shirts….
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 9:57 amAce, if you don’t know the history and the language of the debate over the draft and the volunteer force, then there’s not much I can say: One can either accept the responsibilities of citizenship or refuse them.
AF (c319c8) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:02 amYour laziness is not something I would choose to be proud of.
“Gee, I wonder why you didnāt?”
I wasn’t drafted
AF (c319c8) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:04 amI love it, first:
Yes, please do find comments by a liberal of note somewhere – anywhere – who celebrated Tony Snowās cancer. Please provide links. Weāre waiting.
Comment by The Liberal Avenger
Then:
Thank you, gahrie. Those comments from āJeffIIā and āAnonā are quite damning to the entire liberal movement. I didnāt realize that you had such persuasive evidence on hand.
Comment by The Liberal Avenger
Note the goal post moving there.
First you pretend no comments were made, then when some are provided you pretend that a)only two were offered and b) that they don’t mean anything because you don’t want them to.
To say you are disingenuous is very charitable.
For the record, here are more from the Daily Kos
And,
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:04 amI wasnāt drafted
Comment by AF
And?
What, pray tell, is your point?
Ace, if you donāt know the history and the language of the debate over the draft and the volunteer force, then thereās not much I can say: One can either accept the responsibilities of citizenship or refuse them.
Huh?
You, person too cowardly to serve, have not the slightest clue what you’re talking about here.
Further, nothing about the “debate over the draft” has anything to do with you saying “merc” in a manner that is clearly incorrect.
Your laziness is not something I would choose to be proud of.
And the fact that you’re too much of a coward to have enlisted in the armed forces isn’t something I’d try to mitigate by talking about your dad and brother as if it means anything.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:08 am“I suppose it would be completely over your head to point out the peole who ādid thatā were, in fact, democrats/dem-appointeesā¦”
-Scott Jacobs
I suppose it would also be entirely fucking irrelevant to the discussion… but thanks, Scott. I had forgotten that LBJ was a democrat.
Feel free to link to a reputable source that declares the Gulf of Tonkin a legitimate move on the part of the Johnson administration.
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:21 am[…] ray wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptI react to OāReilly representing āthe Rightā the same way Bouley would probably react to Michael Moore being considered an accurate representation of āthe Leftā in its entirety. And besides, who is the guy? … […]
gammet » Comment on Poor Charles Karel Bouley by Ray G (28d0bd) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:28 am“And the fact that youāre too much of a coward…”
AF (c319c8) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:31 amhuh?
“Uh, how would you know what a āMercā is, exactly?”
-“The Ace”
The number one definition for mercenary is “working or acting merely for money or other reward; venal”.
Thus, when AF says that he doesn’t like “Mercs”, then reinforces that statement by making references to DynCorp and Blackwater, it’s fairly safe to say that he knows what he’s talking about.
While I don’t necessarily agree with AF, I think “The Ace” is characteristically being an idiot.
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:34 amThus, when AF says that he doesnāt like āMercsā, then reinforces that statement by making references to DynCorp and Blackwater, itās fairly safe to say that he knows what heās talking about.
Really?
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:37 amSo you, or AF, would know someone’s motiviations how __________?
While I donāt necessarily agree with AF, I think āThe Aceā is characteristically being an idiot.
Comment by Leviticus
And while I don’t agree with AF, or you, you are being characteristically illiterate.
Or perhaps, deliberately obtuse.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:38 amāAnd the fact that youāre too much of a cowardā¦ā
huh?
Comment by AF
Yes, coward.
That’s about all you can muster.
You didn’t serve.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:39 amYou are maligning those who have while rushing to pretend that your brother serving means anything.
then reinforces that statement by making references to DynCorp and Blackwater
By talking about child prostitutes?
Talk about issue conflation.
And you’re going merrily along with it.
For the record, a bunch of allegations about Blackwater being a “mercenary army” on a “truthdig” Web site are not fact.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:42 amAmusing as it is to hear the Dems warn election cycle after election cycle that Republicans will reinstate the draft, it’s even more amusing to hear Murtha call for it to come back…
Considering the pathetically low pay our military gets, we’d have to see a huge pay-jump in order for a draft to not be a screwing of citizens who would rather get paid more for less danger. I fully understand why people don’t stay in the military for the full 20. The pay and hours suck.
AF, my old man served in ‘Nam, and my uncle was “stationed in Canada”, if you get my meaning. It’s still a point of contention. My father volunteered, my uncle dodged.
You named the members of your family who served, but I don’t seem to see you claiming your service.
Which branch was it again?
Scott Jacobs (e3904e) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:48 amGo ahead and link to any mainstream publication that legitimizes that tripe.
Comment by Leviticus
How about the US Navy Web site.
That “mainstream” enough for you?
,
Or are you going to provide me a link to Wiki?
You also suffer from hindsight wisdom.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:48 amFacts known now were supposed to be known then.
And you get to pretend how smart you are.
Ace,
You know full good and well that isn’t mainstream enough for Levi. It isn’t MSM (obviouly left-leaning while touted as purely moderate and even-handed), and thus couldn’t possibly count.
Scott Jacobs (e3904e) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:53 am“So you, or AF, would know someoneās motiviations how?”
-The Ace
OK…
What, would you say, are the reasons people go to war? I’ll submit the following:
1) Love of country
2) Hatred of an enemy
3) Profit
Now, if Blackwater employees’ only motive in going to war is love of country, why aren’t they enlisted in the US military? You know, the traditional representative of US interests abroad?
I doubt that you’d claim that the reason said employees are in Iraq is to kill Iraqis for the fun of it.
That leaves profit. Which makes them mercenaries, and you an idiot.
By the way, are you a veteran or a fucking hypocrite? The way you talk, it’s one or the other.
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/2/2007 @ 10:54 amBecause Blackwater has a better vacation plan, and can pic it’s own gear, instead of relying on a conviluted congressional approval system…
And actually, teh definition of a merc includes the phrase “for a foreign country”. Since they aren’t fighting for anyone but their home, they actually don’t qualify.
now go fuck off Levi. I got smakced once by Pat for calling you out on what is obviously an anti-america bias in most everything you say, but honestly I’m sick of you and your ilk.
yeah, your ilk. You and TLA and AF and the rest of the “America is like so horrible man” crowd consistantly get on my last god damn nerve.
Scott Jacobs (e3904e) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:00 amYeah… the Navy. I can’t see how they could possibly have any stake in justifying a fabricated attack by the North Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin.
One thing’s for sure: Johnson didn’t take the time to find out whether or not the (non)attack was real. He saw an opening and took it.
Forget it… you guys are probably experts at defending presidents who propagate bullshit to get America into wars.
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:00 amNow, if Blackwater employeesā only motive in going to war is love of country, why arenāt they enlisted in the US military?
Well, maybe that’s because they are not and did not “go to war.”
Ever think of that? You do realize what blackwater does, right?
Further, as already pointed out, many of these contractors are former military.
No go ahead and “support” the troops by slandering them and questioning their motives with your incoherent reading of the dictionary (don’t you find it odd you must base your definition of mercenary by a twisted interpretation of part of how it’s defined?)
I doubt that youād claim that the reason said employees are in Iraq is to kill Iraqis for the fun of it.
Uh, they’re not in Iraq to “kill Iraqis”
So, your entire premise is wrong, and so we’re supposed to pretend you or AF know what a “merc” is.
Rrrriiiigggghhhhhtttt!
That leaves profit. Which makes them mercenaries, and you an idiot
See comments above.
You are simply projecting at this point.
You, just like AF, have not the slightest clue on this topic.
No matter, you’ll continue to embarrass yourself by commenting on it.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:02 amAnd thus my point of Johnson’s political party goes right over your head…
Amazing how I called that one, isn’t it…
Scott Jacobs (e3904e) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:03 amMaybe Pat’ll smack “The Ace” for calling AF a “coward”. Maybe he’ll smack me for calling “The Ace” a fucking hypocrite, or for calling you inarticulate moron.
And maybe he’ll smack you again for reiterating the same tired argument he smacked you for the first time: claiming that you love America and I don’t.
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:04 amOne thingās for sure: Johnson didnāt take the time to find out whether or not the (non)attack was real.
And?
Yes, in your silly little liberal land people “take the time” to “investigate” attacks by enemies.
Poor LBJ, he just listened to “the generals.”
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:04 amWhich is an idea you’re for.
When you’re not against it of course.
Maybe heāll smack me for calling āThe Aceā a fucking hypocrite,
And maybe you’ll get a clue.
I don’t hold out hope, however.
It is comical to watch you leftists meltdown when your ideas are challenged however.
Make baseless attacks of “hypocrisy” where none exists.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:05 amConsidering he seconded Carlito’s comment to TLA, I almost doubt it, jackass.
Scott Jacobs (e3904e) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:06 amWhat, would you say, are the reasons people go to war? Iāll submit the following:
1) Love of country
2) Hatred of an enemy
3) Profit
I don’t know of any instances where the US has gone to war in modern history “for profit”
Again, your entire premise is wrong.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:07 amAnd actually, teh definition of a merc includes the phrase āfor a foreign countryā.
Exactly.
Funny how he and AF left that out, huh?
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:09 amNot funny at all.
It’s entirely expected, because it allows them to bash America, which appears to bring them great amounts of joy.
They sure do it enough.
Scott Jacobs (e3904e) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:25 amYou ignore a longstanding debate: William Westmoreland said he did not want to command an army of mercenaries, and he said that while debating the draft with Milton Friedman!
I say the same thing of liberal sites: “Don’t oversimplify”
AF (c319c8) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:39 amYou ignore a longstanding debate
You calling somone a mercenary, and them actually being a mercenary, are two different things.
The “longstanding debate” you mention has nothing to do with the matter.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 11:49 amI’ll leave it to Leviticus to continue this, if he wants to.
I’m done
AF (c319c8) — 4/2/2007 @ 12:03 pm“For the record, a bunch of allegations about Blackwater being a āmercenary armyā on a ātruthdigā Web site are not fact.”
– “The Ace”
“Blackwater USA is the most comprehensive professional military, law enforcement, security, peacekeeping, and stability operations company in the world.”
-Blackwater USA
That means Blackwater goes to war.
But since you don’t count them as mercenaries (because they’re a US company), try this on for size:
The US hired Aegis Defense Services to do work in Iraq. Aegis is a foreign “defense contractor”. Thus, the US hired foreigners to fight for it… do the math, if you can – if not, ask politely, and I’ll spell it out for you.
So… “The Ace”: are you a veteran?
Scott Jacobs? Veteran?
Leviticus (68eff1) — 4/2/2007 @ 12:24 pmAF: I’m not done with these clowns yet.
Leviticus (68eff1) — 4/2/2007 @ 12:25 pmLeviticus,
No, that makes you wrong and illiterate, and caught foisting a false dichotomy based on premises you have exactly no understanding of.
No American supporting American interests can be a mercenary. Furthermore, mercenaries are paid to fight, not to provide security, nor feed the troops, nor play bodyguard for diplomats.
If you don’t know what a word means, you shouldn’t be using it. And you left our honor and the call of duty.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/2/2007 @ 12:29 pmPablo – They already raised that point, and I already countered it. See the Aegis link. The US uses mercenaries.
“And you left our honor and the call of duty”
-Pablo
What the devil are you talking about?
Leviticus (68eff1) — 4/2/2007 @ 12:50 pmThat means Blackwater goes to war.
Hilarious.
Seriously, get a grip.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 12:54 pmThe US hired Aegis Defense Services to do work in Iraq
Uh, “do work” and “go to war” are two different things.
Which obviously you can’t distinguish between.
Did you even read your own link, moron?
I actually feel sorry for you that this is your “argument.”
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 12:56 pmSee the Aegis link. The US uses mercenaries.
Uh, where does it say that Aegis is “hired to serve in a foreign army, guerrilla organization“?
Point that out for me.
Thanks in advance.
The US uses mercenaries.
Accepting for a minute this is true (when assuredly it is not), your point is _______?
Remember, stupid, AF’s point was that Blackwater’s employees were “mercs”
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 12:58 pmAF: Iām not done with these clowns yet.
Comment by Leviticus
You should be as you are doing nothing but continuning to demonstrate what an utter fool you are.
You can’t even read a dictionary properly.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 12:59 pmWhat, would you say, are the reasons people go to war? Iāll submit the following:
1) Love of country
2) Hatred of an enemy
3) Profit
A desire to kill other people and not be punished for doing so.
David Ehrenstein (2289f8) — 4/2/2007 @ 1:00 pmThe US hired Aegis Defense Services to do work in Iraq. Aegis is a foreign ādefense contractorā. Thus, the US hired foreigners to fight for itā¦ do the math, if you can – if not, ask politely, and Iāll spell it out for you
Prove that.
Please.
Please do.
Yes, because if you simply mention “Iraq” and “security” that makes one a “mercenary” for barely literal liberals everywhere.
By the way, Wiki isn’t a credible source, but I do enjoy the fact that I knew you’d be linking to it.
The Ace (085125) — 4/2/2007 @ 1:03 pmYou don’t have to spell it, you just have to show where they’re hired for combat roles, which is a necessary element of being a mercenary. And are you finally giving up on the incorrect notion that there are American mercenaries in Iraq?
There are mercenaries in Iraq, mostly working for al-Qaeda, but they’re not American.
I had a feeling that concepts like honor and the call of duty would confuse you.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/2/2007 @ 1:04 pm“Remember, stupid, AFās point was that Blackwaterās employees were āmercsā”
-“The Ace”
Noooooo… AF’s point was that he didn’t like “Mercs”, and that the US used them in Iraq.
“Yes, because if you simply mention āIraqā and āsecurityā that makes one a āmercenaryā for barely literal liberals everywhere.”
-“The Ace”
Way to move the goalposts, bud.
Funny that you accuse others of omitting information from links… you must’ve missed this little tidbit from mine:
in re: Aegis’ duties in Iraq,
“a. providing static and mobile security for the PCO and United States Army Corps of Engineers”
So, “The Ace”, Scott Jacobs: Either one of you veterans?
Leviticus (68eff1) — 4/2/2007 @ 1:33 pm“And are you finally giving up on the incorrect notion that there are American mercenaries in Iraq?”
– Pablo
I never said that there were American mercenaries in Iraq; I said that the US employed mercenaries in Iraq… and no, I certainly haven’t given up on that notion.
What do you think of Aegis, Pablo?
Leviticus (68eff1) — 4/2/2007 @ 1:35 pmThe Ace,
Please tone it down. Calling people “stupid” or “fool” is not in keeping with the tone I’m trying to maintain.
Patterico (04465c) — 4/2/2007 @ 1:44 pmNooooooā¦ AFās point was that he didnāt like āMercsā, and that the US used them in Iraq.
No it wasn’t.
The Ace (b64e24) — 4/2/2007 @ 2:04 pmThe Ace,
Please tone it down
Fair enough.
The Ace (b64e24) — 4/2/2007 @ 2:04 pmFunny that you accuse others of omitting information from linksā¦ you mustāve missed this little tidbit from mine:
The Ace (b64e24) — 4/2/2007 @ 2:05 pmFunny that you accuse others of omitting information from linksā¦ you mustāve missed this little tidbit from mine:
Uh, it was omitted because it’s irrelevant.
Nothing you have posted demonstrates that “the US employed mercenaries in Iraq.” Unless of course you change the meaning of the word. Which you are doing.
Just a though, when the US Secret service provides protection for foreign dignataries or ambassadors, they’re merceniaries, right?
Could you point to the place where Ageis is given US Army field uniforms/rank, and weapons and ordered to fight in battle?
Thanks in advance.
The Ace (b64e24) — 4/2/2007 @ 2:08 pmThe Ace,
Please tone it down
I hope you noted this:
While I donāt necessarily agree with AF, I think āThe Aceā is characteristically being an idiot.
Comment by Leviticus
Maybe Patāll smack āThe Aceā for calling AF a ācowardā. Maybe heāll smack me for calling āThe Aceā a fucking hypocrite, or for calling you inarticulate moron.
The Ace (b64e24) — 4/2/2007 @ 2:10 pmLeviticus, comment #112
Leviticus, comment #123:
Then what was it you were trying to say in #112?
I think that if you’re going to argue that they’re mercenaries, you need to show the combat role that they’re hired to perform, or give up that notion. But I’m repeating myself now.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/2/2007 @ 2:15 pmFirst of all, I find it very amusing that AF failed to mention what branch he served in…
As for myself, I enlisted twice, both times being declined for medical reasons (and I’m still working on getting around that, and by god I will serve).
And to Pablo and Ace: Give it up. You’ll never convince these two specific moonbats that the USA is anything but a horrible, evil place. It’s not possible. Hell, republicans get blamed for Vietnam for Christ’s sake. They are unhinged, and incapable of NOT holding this country in contempt. Best we save P’s bandwidth.
Scott Jacobs (e3904e) — 4/2/2007 @ 2:55 pmI didn’t think that AF served, only his family. Anyways, it was a comical read. Thanks!
G (722480) — 4/2/2007 @ 3:04 pmOK, all of you tone it down — unless you’re insulting the Liberal Avenger, in which case, have at it.
Patterico (04465c) — 4/2/2007 @ 3:06 pmI never said that there were American mercenaries in Iraq
Nice find Pablo, it’s pretty clear he’s not too sure of what he’s saying.
Patterico:
I will be more moderate in my replies, I was only giving him some of it back.
Scott Jacobs,
The Ace (b64e24) — 4/2/2007 @ 3:13 pmYou are correct sir!
“OK, all of you tone it down ā unless youāre insulting the Liberal Avenger, in which case, have at it.”
I’ll take that as a compliment Mr Frey.
Gut pesach!
AF (c319c8) — 4/2/2007 @ 5:48 pm“As for myself, I enlisted twice, both times being declined for medical reasons (and Iām still working on getting around that, and by god I will serve)”
-Scott Jacobs
How ’bout you, “The Ace”?
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/3/2007 @ 10:53 am“I think that if youāre going to argue that theyāre mercenaries, you need to show the combat role that theyāre hired to perform, or give up that notion.”
-Pablo
Their contract specified providing “static and mobile security for the PCO”… what, exactly, do you think “mobile security” entails?
I submit “combat”.
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/3/2007 @ 10:56 amYeah, because people providing security ALWAYS have to fire at stuff…
Again, you’re just dead set on showing how eeeeeeeevil America is, aren’t you.
If you think THAT is mercenary work, you best warm up to the idea bubba. A Democrat in the Oval Office will again put us at the beck and call of the UN, and our boys will be france’s bitch again doing what they don’t wanna.
Go take a flying leap, Levi. You have shown time and again that while you might not hate America, you sure have a pretty obvious bias against it…
Cue the Levi whining…
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 4/3/2007 @ 11:23 amHey AF what up with the cherrypicking of my comment?
papertiger (25770b) — 4/3/2007 @ 12:45 pmWhy didn’t you include the reams of drivel you typed about AIDS in Africa? ALL of it in order to derail the conversation on a Global Warming post.
I take it you have noticed how thread bare the AGW position is. Time to switch tactics.
Their contract specified providing āstatic and mobile security for the PCOāā¦ what, exactly, do you think āmobile securityā entails?
I submit ācombatā.
Comment by Leviticus
Well, so the US Secret Service entails “combat” right?
Local police?
US Marshals?
Seriously, look how far you’ve gone to make whatever point you’re trying to make.
The Ace (085125) — 4/3/2007 @ 12:51 pmLet me help you out with that, Leviticus. You seem quite unfamiliar with this source I’m going to offer, but I assure that it is a long honored source and not controlled by Karl Rove.
This is “security”
This is “combat”
You may notice that they are two very different things. Having been someone who has provided both static and mobile security in a US military uniform, and also never having been in combat, I can vouch for the dictionary’s veracity on the subject.
Also, this is not a soldier.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/3/2007 @ 12:53 pmOh, and if it wasn’t obvious enough already, mobile security often entails securing something which is moving, such as a motorcade or in the case of the Fallujah 4, a convoy. It may also entail patrolling a large area which is being secured.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/4/2007 @ 4:34 amThis is getting silly
AF (c319c8) — 4/4/2007 @ 6:13 amlink
and more
And here’s Blackwater’s front page
“Blackwater USA is the most comprehensive professional military, law enforcement, security, peacekeeping, and stability operations company in the world.”
Blackwater=Mercs
AF (c319c8) — 4/4/2007 @ 6:19 am“You seem quite unfamiliar with this source Iām going to offer”
-Pablo
Which I why I linked to the exact same site in this thread, right?
I can’t believe you’re making this argument, Pablo. What do you think men charged with “mobile and static security” duties are going to do when someone attacks the thing they’ve been ordered to protect?
“Hey! Hey… Stop that! Cut it out!”
AF’s right: this is getting silly. You guys have been splitting hairs this entire thread.
Whatever. I’m done. I’m sure plenty of commenters are getting annoyed by our little pissing contest.
Although I’ve got to ask…
“The Ace”? Veteran?
I’ll take your silence on the subject as an emphatic “no”, and laugh in your face for calling AF a coward.
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/4/2007 @ 7:22 amAh, yes you did. So it’s a comprehension problem.
Defend their asset. That is what providing security is all about. A combat role is one in which your job is to attack/capture an asset and/or kill the enemy. Contractors DO NOT fill such roles in Iraq.
Security is not combat, no matter how many times you wish it to be so. Combat is active, aggressive fighting. Security is a defensive deterrent. Not the same thing, and you look foolish suggesting that it is. Are cops soldiers? Is theirs a combat position? Is there the possibility of them engaging in a firefight? No, no and yes.
And again, having done security with automatic weapons, and from time to time a grenade launcher, I think I can differentiate between the two with a measure of authority. I’ve done gobs of security. I’ve done zero combat. They are not the same thing.
What is one of these guys who doesn’t get attacked? Hint: the same thing as someone who does. Security.
No, you’re trying to weave whole cloth out of them. It’s quite silly.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/4/2007 @ 8:17 amOh, geez… I said I was done, but…
Combat:
1) To fight or contend against; oppose vigorously
2) to battle; contend
3) Military. Active, armed fighting with enemy forces
You wouldn’t say that, in the event of an attack, Aegis’ employees “vigorously oppose” their attackers?
You wouldn’t say that they “battle; contend” opposition fighters?
You wouldn’t call “patrolling a large area which is being secured” (your own words) “active”?
You wouldn’t call a man holding an automatic weapon “armed”?
These guys do jobs that meet every definition of the word “combat”.
In re: Aegis = police/ Secret Service,
I wouldn’t be comfortable with a privatized police force patrolling my neighborhood. Would you?
Leviticus (43095b) — 4/4/2007 @ 9:00 amLevi,
carlitos (b38ae1) — 4/4/2007 @ 10:42 amLots of rich neighborhoods have privatized police forces patrolling their neighborhoods. They seem quite comfortable. It’s actually considered a luxury, living in a gated community with private police.
And “private ploice” aren’t police… They are high-end security guards with fairly limited police powers…
It seems that “distinction” is a skill you lack…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 4/4/2007 @ 11:01 amI’ll specify, carlitos… I wouldn’t be comfortable with someone else’s private police force patrolling my neighborhood.
Leviticus (b987b0) — 4/4/2007 @ 11:44 am“āprivate ploiceā arenāt policeā¦It seems that ādistinctionā is a skill you lackā¦”
– Scott Jacobs
Apparently its a skill that Pablo lacks, too… since it’s his analogy.
Leviticus (b987b0) — 4/4/2007 @ 11:46 amLeviticus says:
OK, a couple of hypotheticals then:
– Mike Tyson rolls through your neighborhood. You won’t allow him a bodyguard? Would that make you uncomfortable?
How about the Pope – would the Swiss Guards give you discomfort? How about secret service?
When the Olympic torch came through Chicago, there were Georgia State Troopers running as escort, it didn’t bother me in the least.
Unless the Iraqis are shooting at our convoys, Blackwater doesn’t really bother them much, so what is your objection, and why must they be ‘mercs’ or whatever? I mean, if these convoys are being attacked, what’s the difference whether the defenders are military, police, private, volunteer, whatever? It has nothing whatsoever to do with mercenaries, who fight wars for pay.
carlitos (b38ae1) — 4/4/2007 @ 12:11 pm“Unless the Iraqis are shooting at our convoys, Blackwater doesnāt really bother them much”
-carlitos
Aegis does.
Leviticus (b987b0) — 4/4/2007 @ 12:24 pmWhat I mean is, if Mike Tyson’s body guards were authorized to shoot anything they thought threatened their employer, yes, it would make me uncomfortable.
Or, as in the case of Aegis, they had a reputation for shooting people at random…
Leviticus (cd96c4) — 4/4/2007 @ 12:43 pmGood grief.
I served in the USMC.
My father served in the Army. My mother served in the WAVES. My brothers all attemped to enlist, but were declined for various medical reasons; my sister did not. Three of my nephews are currently serving, and within two months all of them will have served in OIF or OEF. Two of my nieces, still in high school, are considering the AF or the USMC.
One of my grandfathers served, first in the Army, then in the Navy. The other grandfather declined for religious reasons to serve in a military overseas, but organized the local Home Guard.
All — ALL — of their fourteen sons served, Army, Marines, Army Air Force, Air Force. Four of their daughters served, WAVES, WACS, Coast Guard. One of the other daughters toured for three years as a USO pianist.
We have fought in every war that the United States has been involved in excepting Panama, including the Revolutionary War (both sides! [waves to Canadian relatives who left afterwards]) I haven’t polled the inlaws; I suspect that at least one of them served in Panama, but it really doesn’t matter.
The reason that we have done this is so that everyone here can express their ideas, even those whose primary idea is that others didn’t serve.
Act like grownups, please. Dismissed!
htom (412a17) — 4/4/2007 @ 1:24 pmBut then, contractors aren’t patrolling neighborhoods. You want a match for that strawman, Leviticus?
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/4/2007 @ 3:56 pmWhich of those terms do you suppose applies to the contractors’ role in Iraq, Leviticus? Hint: none of them.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/4/2007 @ 3:57 pmAnd all those guns serve… what purpose? Decoration? Ballast? Gimme a friggin’ break.
Leviticus (5a3650) — 4/4/2007 @ 5:37 pmTavern owner: “Bah, you a samurai, and always harping about money.”
nk (37b8ef) — 4/4/2007 @ 5:42 pmToshiro Mifune: “Dangerous work. Have to make it pay.”
(Akira Kurosawa’s “Yojimbo”.)
So cop and armored car driver are combat roles? Uh, no. Give yourself a break, Leviticus. You can only run face first into a wall so many times in a row, you know.
Pablo (08e1e8) — 4/4/2007 @ 9:51 pmbest business credit card…
Him consolidate credit card loan best business credit card…
ez money payday loan (75b7ff) — 1/7/2008 @ 10:17 amonline blackjack game blackjack card game online…
As shown in citi credit card application status american airline credit card…
calculator card consolidation credit credit card consolidation calculator (38303f) — 5/5/2008 @ 6:13 am